On who/whom in popular culture

Just out, I wrote earlier today, New Horizons in Prescriptivism Research, and in it there is an article I wrote on the exploitation of who/whom as a usage problem in popular culture: television series, films, popular novels. And here is another one, with as many as two references to the issue in Richard Osman’s novel The Thursday Murder Club (2020), once in the main text (“Who did what to who? Or is it, Whom did what to who? Either way …”, p. 237) and the second time in the Acknowledgements (a jab at the author’s copy-editor about correcting who/whom errors, p. 381). What is it with the who/whom issue? Is it a particular but within popular culture because people are insecure about what it should be? I’d have thought that nobody could be bothered about it any more, because our usage poll shows that who for whom is barely considered unacceptable any more. So what is going on here? (If you want to read more about the who/whom issue, have a look at my newly published paper.)

To be fair, there is one other usage problem in the book, on the use of me for I, which one of the characters, a sloppy police constable, is corrected for, five pages down from the who/whom comment (p. 242). Why only there? Or was the author havng it out with his copy-editor?

Posted in polls and surveys, usage features | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Out now – another very interesting book on prescriptivism

Congratulations, editors Nuria Yañez-Bouza, María Esther Rodríguez-Gil and Javier Pérez-Guerra! You did a great job editing and publishing the proceedings of the 6th Prescriptivism conference held at Vigo in 2021. The book can now be ordered from Multilingual Matters, on whose website you’ll be able to find out more about the contents of this important contribution to the field of prescriptivism.

Posted in news | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Singular ‘they’ in Dutch?

“Will everyone put down their phone?” is quite common in English today. It has been around as a construction since at least the 14th century, developed into quite a controversial feature in the language, but as our Usage poll #10 shows, is barely considered unacceptable any more.

But today, for the first time, I spotted the construction in Dutch, used by a 16-year-old: “Iedereen heeft hun telefoon weg gelegd.” Is this the beginning of a new trend in Dutch? And should it indeed be marked as a mistake? The context is relatively informal. Comments, please?

Source: Dutch Facebook post.

Posted in Dutch prescriptivism, news, usage features | Tagged , | Leave a comment

“Inputted” on the increase?

On reading a PhD thesis from the University of Sheffield on the phonology of West Cornwall English (excellent data collection, detailed and very meticulous methodology description) I encountered the word inputted, which set me thinking. The context was very clearly past, so to my mind input would have done the job. This made me wondering if perhaps the form overtly marked for past tense might be on the increase today?

A good tool to check this is the Google n-gram viewer, which provides written data across time that can be separated to see what is going on in British and American English. The data showed that very different processes are going on within these two varieties:

Two very different patterns. What would explain them? Any role played by prescriptivism here, with a stronger effect on American English? Further research would definitely be of interest!

Posted in usage features | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Soon coming out

New Horizons in Prescriptivism Research, edited by Nuria Yáñez‐Bouza, María E. Rodríguez‐Gil and Javier Pérez‐Guerra, will by published by Multilingual Matters in the Spring. Congratulations, editors! Looking forward to seeing the book in print soon! Further details here.

Posted in announcement, news | Tagged | Leave a comment

Using HUGE in your research

Over the past few years, quite a few scholars have requested access to our HUGE database. We are always happy to do so, and usually ask them to let us know how they made use of the database in their research. Today, an article came in that did so, and this led to a page in this blog’s banner that keeps track of such publications. Also to encourage other scholars to tell us about their publications!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

7th Prescriptivism conference

The seventh edition of this wonderful conference series will take place from 26 to 28 June 2024 in Aix en Provence, in France. Plenary speakers will be Ian Cushing (Manchester Metropolitan University, UK), Jane Hodson (University of Sheffield, UK) and Nuria Yáñez-Bouza (University of Vigo, Spain).

This edition’s topic will be Transmitting Prescriptivism and Norms, and the deadline for submitting abstracts is 15 January 2024. For more details, see the conference website.

Looking forward to another great conference on prescriptivism!

Posted in announcement, events, news | Tagged | Leave a comment

Tryna into the OED?

Rereading Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye (1951) this summer reminded me of one of the last BA theses I supervised before I retired nearly three years ago. The student writing the thesis was analysing twitter messages, and told me he was hoping to come across tryna in his data. Tryna? He said it was a common form on social media platforms, meaning “trying to”. It was all new to me.

Not so as it happens, for I actually would have come across it when I first read The Catcher in the Rye some time during the mid-1970s, only at the time it probably didn’t strike me as a form worth noticing. Nor did it when I reread the novel ten years later for a paper I wrote for a retiring colleague’s Festschrift. I’ve reproduced the paper elsewhere on this blog.

Third time lucky, it seems: tryna I now noticed occurring several times in the novel, as on p. 50 of my Penguin copy: “I was tryna sleep before you guys started making all that noise.” This is not the main character, Holden Caulfield, speaking, but his roommate. Another instance in the novel is highlighted by Jane Hodson in her book Dialect in Film & Literature (2014: 100), where she comments on the sociolinguistic contrast between Holden’s use of trying to and the pimp’s response: “Nobody’s tryna chisel nobody.” So in writing, even though it reflects fictional speech, the word is at least some 75 years old. But it has no entry in the OED. Should it have? I’m interested to hear what readers of this blog think.

Doing a Google Ngram check confirms that the word was in (written) use already during the 1950s, with an interesting bleep at the time for British English. Could this have been a Catcher-in-the-Rye effect? The graph also shows a steep rise for British English since the 2000s (top), but a decline for American English setting in about ten years ago (bottom). What is going on here, I wonder? Any thoughts?

Posted in usage features | Tagged , | 4 Comments

The Routledge prescriptivism handbook

My copy has arrived, and I’m immensely pleased to be holding it in my hands at last! Some figures:

1 book

3 editors, 2 members of the editorial board

3 parts, 26 papers plus 1 introduction and 1 afterword

45 contributors

19 figures, 21 tables

xxxi plus 489 pages

17 pages of index

and it weighs 1.087 kg or 2 pounds and 6.302 oz.

Impressive, on all counts. Congratulations, everyone. Looking forward to reading it!

Posted in news | Tagged | Leave a comment

Soon to appear

You can pre-order now!

Congratulations, Joan, Morana, Robin! Looking forward to reading it.

Posted in announcement, news | Leave a comment